(June 15, 2017) The late withdrawal of two candidates for the Ocean Pines Association Board of Directors and late entry of information by a third person, last week, prompted the association’s elections committee to consider further changes to the bylaws.
The board passed an overhaul of the elections resolution in April that included changes to the way votes are counted, strict word-count limits to candidate statements in official publications, the allowance for more than one official candidate forum, and several items that were deemed as legal housekeeping.
The elections committee developed the document that went on to a vote by the board. One alteration the committee favored — announcing voting results immediately after the ballots are counted — was vetoed by the directors.
During a meeting last Friday, elections committee Chairman Steve Tuttle said two candidates, Arie Klapholz and Paula Robertson Gray, resigned last week. He said Gray sent him a letter.
Candidates were asked to submit a short bio and answers to three questions as of 5 p.m. last Thursday. That information was released this week and will be published in an upcoming association newsletter and included in ballot mailings.
When two candidates did not submit their statements before the deadline, Tuttle said he contacted them. He said Klapholz informed him he had sent a letter of resignation to Board President Tom Herrick.
“I’ve not seen the letter yet,” Tuttle said. “I sent an email to Tom and asked him to please get me a copy of it, because I’d like it for the file.”
Another candidate, not specifically named during the meeting but is Nicole Schafer Crosariol also had not sent in her information before the deadline, Tuttle said.
“Her response back to me was I was planning to just hand it in today at the candidate draw,” Tuttle said. “I guess what’s a little frustrating is the candidate who didn’t get the information in on time is the one who ignored CPI [compliance, permit and inspections] violations and other things in the past.”
Tuttle said each candidate was sent a list of deadlines in May, immediately after their applications were approved and announced publically. He noted the deadlines were written in bold print.
“Reading comprehension is not particularly high,” committee member Steve Habeger said with a laugh.
Another committee member, Rick Turner, said the incident raised some red flags.
“A candidate could say, ‘wait a second, [that information] was supposed to have been here by then, it was not,’ and they could protest,” he said.
Director Slobodan Trendic, the liaison to the committee, suggested seeking the opinion of the bylaws and resolutions committee as to what happens when a candidate does not comply with deadlines.
“Right now the resolution really doesn’t spell out what your authority is – how do you handle missing deadlines?” he said. “Right now there’s nothing that states whether that’s cause for disqualification or anything, but it does affect your ability to meet your own deadlines if the candidates are late.
“It’s an area that Resolution M-06 really does not address and you as a committee need to know what your authority is,” Trendic continued. “What happens if there is something even more serious down the road that affects your going to print ballots?”
Tuttle agreed.
“I did go back, I read the bylaws. I looked at M-06 again. There’s nothing in there that really gives us authority to enforce that deadline,” he said. “I think that’s something that ought to be clarified in the future. A deadline is a deadline. I tend to feel like, if I ask for something, I certainly expect it by then.”
The candidate draw, determining the order each person appears on the ballots and speaks during the forums, was held about a half-hour after the elections committee meeting last Friday. Tuttle said he planned to use that time to reemphasize the importance of deadlines.
“I think at this point, that’s really our only option,” he said.
Turner and Habeger said the issue could resurface during the campaign.
“It ought to make for an interesting forum,” Turner said.
Habeger added the topic could be something to “help keep people awake.”
The board passed an overhaul of the elections resolution in April that included changes to the way votes are counted, strict word-count limits to candidate statements in official publications, the allowance for more than one official candidate forum, and several items that were deemed as legal housekeeping.
The elections committee developed the document that went on to a vote by the board. One alteration the committee favored — announcing voting results immediately after the ballots are counted — was vetoed by the directors.
During a meeting last Friday, elections committee Chairman Steve Tuttle said two candidates, Arie Klapholz and Paula Robertson Gray, resigned last week. He said Gray sent him a letter.
Candidates were asked to submit a short bio and answers to three questions as of 5 p.m. last Thursday. That information was released this week and will be published in an upcoming association newsletter and included in ballot mailings.
When two candidates did not submit their statements before the deadline, Tuttle said he contacted them. He said Klapholz informed him he had sent a letter of resignation to Board President Tom Herrick.
“I’ve not seen the letter yet,” Tuttle said. “I sent an email to Tom and asked him to please get me a copy of it, because I’d like it for the file.”
Another candidate, not specifically named during the meeting but is Nicole Schafer Crosariol also had not sent in her information before the deadline, Tuttle said.
“Her response back to me was I was planning to just hand it in today at the candidate draw,” Tuttle said. “I guess what’s a little frustrating is the candidate who didn’t get the information in on time is the one who ignored CPI [compliance, permit and inspections] violations and other things in the past.”
Tuttle said each candidate was sent a list of deadlines in May, immediately after their applications were approved and announced publically. He noted the deadlines were written in bold print.
“Reading comprehension is not particularly high,” committee member Steve Habeger said with a laugh.
Another committee member, Rick Turner, said the incident raised some red flags.
“A candidate could say, ‘wait a second, [that information] was supposed to have been here by then, it was not,’ and they could protest,” he said.
Director Slobodan Trendic, the liaison to the committee, suggested seeking the opinion of the bylaws and resolutions committee as to what happens when a candidate does not comply with deadlines.
“Right now the resolution really doesn’t spell out what your authority is – how do you handle missing deadlines?” he said. “Right now there’s nothing that states whether that’s cause for disqualification or anything, but it does affect your ability to meet your own deadlines if the candidates are late.
“It’s an area that Resolution M-06 really does not address and you as a committee need to know what your authority is,” Trendic continued. “What happens if there is something even more serious down the road that affects your going to print ballots?”
Tuttle agreed.
“I did go back, I read the bylaws. I looked at M-06 again. There’s nothing in there that really gives us authority to enforce that deadline,” he said. “I think that’s something that ought to be clarified in the future. A deadline is a deadline. I tend to feel like, if I ask for something, I certainly expect it by then.”
The candidate draw, determining the order each person appears on the ballots and speaks during the forums, was held about a half-hour after the elections committee meeting last Friday. Tuttle said he planned to use that time to reemphasize the importance of deadlines.
“I think at this point, that’s really our only option,” he said.
Turner and Habeger said the issue could resurface during the campaign.
“It ought to make for an interesting forum,” Turner said.
Habeger added the topic could be something to “help keep people awake.”